Wednesday 26 December 2012

The effects of nuclear weapons

BFTF'd formative years were back in the 1980's, a decade marked by great music, the beginnings of the revival of the English national footy team, overstyled hair (on both sexes) and, more disturbingly, the ever present threat of nuclear war.

Those of a younger generation may not appreciate just how real this possibility was, but BFTF can vividly recall programmes such as Weekend World routinely discussing what would happen if the Soviets rolled into West Germany and there was a (so called "limited") nuclear war. For example, check out this interview with Margaret Thatcher (scroll down to Part 2) ,and a listing of another example here

There was the concept of the "4 minute warning" which was the time between Soviet missiles being detected - and the missiles delivering their nuclear payload to the UK.

Docu-dramas such as the US made "The Day After" and the UK film "Threads" brought home to people just how devastating a nuclear war would be - and how long lived would be its consequences.

And this is despite the fact that those films did not even begin to portray the full horror of the level of human death, misery and devastation that even a single nuclear weapon could cause.

Even today, a quarter of a century later, just thinking about Threads gives BFTF a bad feeling in the pit of the stomach.

And the threat of nuclear apolcalypse filtered through to popular culture, for example in music by Nena, Sting and The Jam - and also into films such as "War Games". See also this Wiki article.

Even if you escaped the direct effects of blast and radiation in a nuclear exchange, the following were sobering facts that you needed to face:

If you were a person who depended on medication to lead a healthy life then a nuclear war meant that your medication would disappear.

If you lived in a city then a nuclear war meant that food and water supplies would stop immediately.

Gas and electricity supplied would stop immediately - there would be no domestic heating.

Effects of Nuclear Weapons
A report by the organisation Medact describes how, for a relatively small 75kt (i.e. weapon with an explosive equivalent to 75,000 tonnes of TNT) the following would be the case:

50% of people within a 5.4kn radius would die or be injured from blast overpressure effects and that, at this distance:
"Walls of typical steel-frame buildings blown away [and] severe damage to dwelling houses...Full thickness skin burns are likely up to around 4km away from the blast. [These] only heal very slowly with scarring and, under normal conditions, are usually treated by skin grafting".

Radiation affect the body in three main ways.
i) Bone Marrow : Depressed production of white blood cells and platelets:
"Loss of white blood cells results in susceptibility to infections and the development of spontaneous haemorrhages. These effects may be fatal, usually at the end of the fourth week after exposure or the subject may gradually recover."

ii) Gasto-Intestinal : These effects occur at higher radiation levels, the report stating that:
"The main initial damage is to the cells lining the small intestine. This results in massive diarrhoea with loss of body fluids and the risk of septicaemia from bacteria that have gained access through the damaged lining. These symptoms occur earlier than in the bone-marrow form and, if the subject survives, are likely to be followed by the features of the bone-marrow form described above."

iii) Central Nervous System : This is affected at very high levels of radiation resulting in:
"convulsions, coma and death within a few hours. At somewhat lower doses, there is a gradual loss of mental and physical activity, followed by disorientation, coma and death in a few days."

A shocking testimony from Hiroshima
The report includes a description of the nuclear attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. At Hiroshima, a priest, Father Kleinsorge, was asked to help some soldiers and it was later reported that:
'When he had penetrated the bushes, he saw there were about 20 men and they were all in exactly the same nightmarish state; their faces were wholly burned, their eye sockets were hollow, the fluid from their melted eyes had run down their cheeks.' This was the result of having their faces upturned when the bomb exploded"

"Square Leg"
The report mentions the 1980 'Square Leg' NATO exercise, in which an attack of 5 One Megaton weapons on London was simulated. Medact comments that:
"Based upon the 1971 census, when the population of Greater London was 7.2 million (private householders only), blast effects alone would have resulted in 1.1 million immediate deaths and 2.4 - 2.9 million injured. If only 1% of the population were directly exposed to the effects of heat in the open there would have been approximately 28,000 partial-thickness and 5,000 full-thickness burns among those who had not been killed or injured by the effects of blast. If 25% had been exposed, the corresponding figures would have been 700,000 partial-thickness and 125,000 full-thickness burns."

It almost happened
It is worth remembering that a major nuclear exchange - which would have devastated much of human civilisation - very nearly happened on at least two occasions; once in the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis and - at a time of heightened tensions - in a 1983 false missile alarm in the Russian early warning system.
What Medact want to see.
Although their work is wide ranging, Medact was originally formed by a 1992 merger of Medical Association for the Prevention of War, and the Medical Campaign Against Nuclear Weapons. Given this history, it is not surprising that their view is that:

"As health professionals we are aware that the continued possession of nuclear weapons and the development of new nuclear weapons is not only dangerous but a huge waste of resources. At a time when our National Health Service is acutely short of funds, for Britain to embark on a programme to develop a new nuclear weapon system to replace Trident, with capital costs of up to £25 billion and running costs of perhaps £50 billion more, would divert massive resources and potentially create death and sickness on a massive scale, would be totally irresponsible.

It is essential to begin realistic negotiations between all the actual and potential nuclear weapon states to bring about nuclear disarmament, as they are under an obligation to achieve under Article 6 of the NPT. The objective should be a Nuclear Weapons Convention, which would ban the production, stockpiling or use of nuclear weapons and require the destruction of existing stockpiles as do the Biological and Chemical Weapons Conventions for the respective weapons. A draft NWC drawn up by Costa Rica already exists as a United Nations document."

Further Information
Wikipedia article on effects of nuclear weapons
Medact articles on Nuclear Weapons
CND page on nuclear weapon effects
Hiroshima Remembered


Hiroshima, after the nuclear attack



Image Source
Hiroshima Aftermath

Wednesday 5 December 2012

Amazon, I can't shop with you any more

Just sent the followng to Amazon.

Dear Amazon,

I love your products, your service and your prices.

But I love the the NHS, the Police Force, schoolteachers, roads and libraries more.

By paying only £1.8million on sales of £3,500million in the last year you are putting at risk these great institutions as well as some of the country's most vulnerable people.

I won't give my money to a company that is running the UK down by not paying it's fair share of tax. You have already lost hundreds of pounds of my spending and, if you continue on your current path, you will miss out on hundreds of pounds more over the next year.

You know what is the right thing to do.

Do it.


Update 02 Jan 13
Dear reader, you may wish to sign the petition at Change.org to pressure Amazon into paying corporation tax in the UK. The petition is by Frances and Keith Smith who say :

"We pay our taxes and so should Amazon!

We run the Kenilworth and Warwick bookshops, independent shops which have been a proud part of our local high streets for many years. As we run into the busy Christmas period, we are proud of the personal service we provide to all those who visit our store.

But times are tough and getting tougher.

We face unrelenting pressure from huge online retailers undercutting prices, in particular Amazon and it's pushing businesses like ours to the brink. But what’s even worse is that Amazon, despite making sales of £2.9 BILLION in the UK last year, does not pay any UK corporation tax on the profits from those sales. In my book, that is not a level playing field and leaves independent retailers like us struggling to compete just because we do the right thing.

All Amazon UK book and toy sales are routed through its Luxembourg subsidiary...Experts say if Amazon's total UK sales profits were not funnelled to Luxembourg, it could be paying as much as £100m a year in British corporation tax. As Independent booksellers, we are happy with competition in the market but it must be on level terms and by dodging corporation tax in this way, Amazon start with an unfair advantage....We pay our taxes and so should they -- please take a stand with us and tell Amazon to pay their fair share.

Until they do, please consider purchasing from local, independent shops instead.



Update 18Mar13 : Millions of Britons are using consumer power to boycott companies seen to be avoiding their fair share of UK tax, new reaserch reveals. A ComRes survey about public perceptions around tax avoidance, commissioned by Christian Aid, revealed some remarkable aspects of the UK publics views about multi-nationals and their tax payments :

34% say they are currently boycotting the products/sevices of a company because it doesn't pay its fair share of tax in the UK.
45% say they are considering a boycott.
72% of people agreed the Gov't should ensure UK-based companies pay the proper amount of tax in all countries every operate in.
89% said it is unfair that they have to pay their taxes when multinationals can avoid doing so,
85% say we need global leaders to stop multinationals from abusing the tax system, ‘People understand the importance of developing countries being able to collect tax that is owed to them by multinational corporations. Tax is a powerful weapon against poverty and three quarters of Britons agree that if developing countries could collect more tax then they would, in time, be less dependent on international aid, and therefore better able to provide for their own people,’ adds Joseph Stead. Christian Aid estimates that at present, multinationals’ tax dodging costs poor countries $160billon every year, far more than they receive in aid.

Christian Aid is part of the Enough Food For Everyone IF coalition, which is calling on governments to stop big companies dodging tax in poor countries, so that millions of people can free themselves from hunger. The group of more than 100 charities and faith organisations wants the UK public to ask their MPs to lobby the Chancellor ahead of the Budget on 20 March. Enough Food For Everyone IF wants the Chancellor to use this Budget to require multinational companies to reveal the tax avoidance schemes they use in developing countries – and to commit the UK to sharing the resulting information with the countries concerned. This would help their tax authorities to decide how best to use their very limited resources.

Update:15th May2013
An article in the Guardian reveals that the HMRC has four criteria for deciding whether a company should pay corporation tax:

1) Is there trading activity by the non-resident company?
2) Does that trading take place in the UK?
3) Does the non-resident company have a fixed place of business in the UK?
4) Is the trade carried on through that fixed place of business? Or, if there is no fixed place of business, is the trade carried on through a dependent agent?

The Guardian comments that :

"The [Amazon]company indicates on its website it carries out a wide range of activities from his corporate offices in Slough in Berkshire. It says: "UK Corporate Offices – Slough, Berkshire, England. Since 1998, our teams have developed a genuinely British site with the same commitment to customers, cutting-edge technology and rich editorial content that has made Amazon.com such a success. Our Slough teams manage all corporate functions, including buying, marketing, software development, sales and legal."

And yet :

"Despite Amazon EU Sarl's extensive activities in the UK, it appears that HMRC inspectors – for reasons we cannot know – have accepted the retailer's insistence that this business is not captured by these four tests."


: BFTF has heard of a company called Hive.co.uk, who work with a network of local booksellers.

: Bought a book from Hive.co.uk, for a price that was similar to that of Amazon. Hive told BFTF (via Twitter) that "Hive is a UK registered company and as such are liable for, and pay, all relevant UK taxes. We’re UK through and through." and that, in relation to the commssion they paid local independent booksellers "Commission is dictated by value of the order. Typically it's between 2%-20%, but as stated, it varies depending on your order."

Hive.co.uk say they pay taxes and pay 2-20% commission to local bookstores

Related Links
38degrees Tax Dodger Guide
Amazon Warehouse in Spain (Source)